Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

None, they have a "zero tolerance" policy against tobacco products, it seems (it isn't in the school handbook like the other rules). We talked them into another chance for him, we argued he didn't know the severity of it (which is true) but he's still getting detention for a month.

"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr

The handbook says that tobacco products are "prohibited" on school grounds, but no punishment is given and nothing is said about "zero tolerance". I think it's a pretty harsh way to treat a first offender, especially an orphan who's been abused most of his life and already has severe abandonment issues.

"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr

They introduced zero tolerance, instant expulsion for drugs when I was still at school. Even for pot. Smoking was your standard detention or whatever if you were caught on school grounds. I recall one chap getting caught and let off because he was old enough to legally smoke, he wasn't smoking at the time and his packet was unopened. That was one frustrated teacher.

I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....

It's abject stupidity like this on the part of government officials that brings out my "inner Republican" ...

KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- A massive recall has been issued for barbecue cooked at this past weekend's American Royal at Kansas Speedway.

Volunteers collected thousands of pounds of what they call “perfectly good barbecue” from the annual event to feed the hungry. But when Kansas City health inspectors found it, they threw it in the garbage.

Harvesters Community Food Network said a labeling error led to the issue, but didn't elaborate on how it occurred.

A Kansas City Health Department food inspector uncovered the issue during an annual inspection Wednesday at Hope City, which had just received it's shipment of barbecue from American Royal.

“It was the whole gamut, if you can think of the most magnificent barbecue spread that’s what we threw away yesterday by the hundreds of pounds,” Hope City Associate Director Bill Durkes said.

For five years now Kookers Kare, a group of barbecue chefs with hearts as big as their stomachs, has worked with Harvesters to collect the extra food not turned over to judges at the competition. This year that was more than 3,000 pounds of meat, and 1,200 pounds of sides.

The organization's president, Gary Denham, said they had a refrigerated truck at American Royal, and his team of food safety experts only collected food that was either piping hot or ice cold.

It’s then distributed to ministries with food kitchens like Hope City on Kansas City’s East side.

“Everyone out there is like all right we are going to eat. Beans, potatoes, brisket, burnt ends, ribs, it’s awesome,” Durkes said.

But when Kansas City health inspectors showed up just as they were about to pass out the food to 150 hungry and needy recipients, the inspector ordered about 700 pounds of barbecue to be thrown out. It was then covered in bleach to make sure no one tried to get it out of the dumpster.

“They were expecting lunch and for it to be a really good lunch and just having it taken away it was a bummer, we were all bummed out,” Durkes said.

Health officials say the food was destroyed because it wasn’t from a permitted establishment, and they couldn’t track where the food had been. Therefore, they couldn’t ensure it’s safety.

Denham said if health inspectors had any questions they should have just asked. Instead hundreds already went hungry, and it appears as many as 3,000 people won’t get meals as a result of the recall.

The kids up the street from the garage have an amazing lemonade/tea stand, it's first class with 24oz styrofoam cups, crushed ice, lids, and long straws. Some of the best I've ever had, and for only a buck. Unless it's raining they're out there 12 hours /day, often with a line of customers. Gotta admire their work ethic.

"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr

Now, I'm faced with the issue with websites noticing that I have an ad blocker and requesting me to turn it off. Sometimes it is merely a request and other times, I cannot view the website at all with the ad blocker on.

Now, I'm faced with the issue with websites noticing that I have an ad blocker and requesting me to turn it off. Sometimes it is merely a request and other times, I cannot view the website at all with the ad blocker on.

Now, I'm faced with the issue with websites noticing that I have an ad blocker and requesting me to turn it off. Sometimes it is merely a request and other times, I cannot view the website at all with the ad blocker on.

I get that as well. And if it's a site that I rarely visit that uses annoying ads then whatever. I just won't visit their site. But if it's a site that I frequent and the ads are reasonable then I'll gladly whitelist them.

Now, I'm faced with the issue with websites noticing that I have an ad blocker and requesting me to turn it off. Sometimes it is merely a request and other times, I cannot view the website at all with the ad blocker on.

Most times, I'm fine with not viewing the page. Bild does this - a conservative yellow-press tabloid. Who cares?

So it's annoying when they block you from viewing the site, but honestly... what is the endgame here, for users or publishers? If we all start blocking ads, that is the same as the publishers selling no ads, which will mean no free content on the web. Then everyone loses. The only situation that I think everyone could accept is a reasonable amount of ads, nothing that covers the page or takes up too much bandwidth, but how do we get to there? If a publisher starts going down the path of sane ads, they see no immediate benefit from it, because the people who are blocking the ads don't notice any difference.

This is why the "acceptable ads" thing, generally seen as scummy, is at least a way forward, because it lets publishers move towards less annoying ads and still get some revenue - and in the end, move everyone to better ads for the same revenue. It is despicable that they charge for inclusion, but it is at least an attempt to let the ecosystem survive long term. The problem with it is that Outbrain and Taboola (those "from around the web" things with clickbaity articles) are always included in acceptable ads, and I hate them with a passion, so I occasionally turn off even that setting. Yes, I am part of the problem, and I know it.

This is why adblockers are a harder problem to solve than piracy, because for piracy there was always an endgame - sell the content widely and price it fairly, and piracy will disappear by itself - but there isn't a path there for publishers.

The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.